Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!

Date

Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:16:00 -0700

"Paul Menage" <menage@google.com> writes:

> No, Sam was saying that nsproxy should be the object that all resource> controllers hook off.

I think implementation wise this tends to make sense.However it should have nothing to do with semantics.

If we have a lot of independent resource controllers. Placing thepointer to their data structures directly in nsproxy instead of intask_struct sounds like a reasonable idea but it should not be uservisible.